DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Kline, 124 N.W.2d 416.

31 citing documents.

  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
    in which the court stated, “Our responsibility ext ends no further than to make a painstaking review of the record to determine whether the evidence, direct and circumstantial, viewed most favorably to support a finding of guilt, was 8 sufficient to permit the jury to reach that conclusion.” Id.
  • State v. Smallwood 594 N.W.2d 144 Minn. 1999
  • State v. Smallwood 594 N.W.2d 144 Minn. 1999
    See State v. Kline, 266 Minn. 372, 382-83 , -24 (1963).
  • Tucker v. State 245 N.W.2d 199 Minn. 1976
  • Tucker v. State 245 N.W.2d 199 Minn. 1976
    This court, in State v. Kline, 266 Minn. 372, 382 , set forth the standard for permissible prose-cutorial opening statements: “The prosecution may outline the facts in the opening statement which he expects to prove to aid the jury in following the testimony.
  • State v. Otten 195 N.W.2d 590 Minn. 1972
  • State v. Otten 195 N.W.2d 590 Minn. 1972
    State v. Harrison, 279 Minn. 310 , State v. Markuson, 261 Minn. 515 , State v. Kline, 266 Minn. 372 , certiorari denied, 376 U. S. 962 , 84 S. Ct. 1124 , 11 L. ed. 2d 980 (1964); State v. Norgaard, 272 Minn. 48 , Cady v. United States, 54 App. D. C. 10, 293 F. 829 (1923).
  • State v. Mytych 194 N.W.2d 276 Minn. 1972
  • State v. Mytych 194 N.W.2d 276 Minn. 1972
    State v. Thompson, 273 Minn. 1, 36 , , certiorari denied, 385 U. S. 817 , 87 S. Ct. 39 , 17 L. ed. 2d 56 (1966); State v. Kline, 266 Minn. 372, 374 , certiorari denied, 376 U. S. 962 , 84 S. Ct. 1124 , 11 L. ed. 2d 980 (1964).
  • State v. Whelan 189 N.W.2d 170 Minn. 1971
  • State v. Whelan 189 N.W.2d 170 Minn. 1971
    State v. Kline, 266 Minn. 372 , 124 N. W. (2d) 416 , certiorari denied, 376 U. S. 962 , 84 S. Ct. 1124 , 11 L. ed. (2d) 980.
  • State v. Bergland 187 N.W.2d 622 Minn. 1971
  • State v. Bergland 187 N.W.2d 622 Minn. 1971
    State v. Kline, 266 Minn. 372 , 124 N. W. (2d) 416 , certiorari denied, 376 U. S. 962 , 84 S. Ct. 1124 , 11 L. ed. (2d) 980; State v. Ellingson, 283 Minn. 208 , 167 N. W. (2d) 55 .
  • State v. Reichenberger 182 N.W.2d 692 Minn. 1970
  • State v. Reichenberger 182 N.W.2d 692 Minn. 1970
    State v. Kline, 266 Minn. 372 , 124 N. W. (2d) 416 , certiorari denied, 376 U. S. 962 , 84 S. Ct. 1124 , 11 L. ed. (2d) 980.
  • State v. Love 173 N.W.2d 423 Minn. 1970
  • State v. Love 173 N.W.2d 423 Minn. 1970
    1 State v. Kline, 266 Minn. 372, 374 , 124 N. W. (2d) 416, 418 , certiorari denied, 376 U. S. 962 , 84 S. Ct. 1124 ,11 L. ed. (2d) 980, and cases cited in note 2.
  • State v. Williams 163 N.W.2d 868 Minn. 1969
  • State v. Williams 163 N.W.2d 868 Minn. 1969
    Savage v. Minnesota, 355 U. S. 918 , 78 S. Ct. 348 , 2 L. ed. (2d) 277, i. e., that the record be “viewed most favorably to support a finding of guilt.” State v. Kline, 266 Minn. 372, 374 , 124 N. W. (2d) 416, 418 , certiorari denied, 376 U. S. 962 , 84 S. Ct. 1124 , 11 L. ed. (2d) 980.
  • State v. Baker 160 N.W.2d 240 Minn. 1968
  • State v. Baker 160 N.W.2d 240 Minn. 1968
    However, while the statement would have been better omitted, the rule is that the prosecutor “may outline the facts in the opening statement which he expects to prove” and “[i]f the facts are stated in good faith with reasonable grounds to believe that the evidence to be offered in proof of such facts is admissible, no error is committed.” State v. Kline, 266 Minn. 372, 382 , 124 N. W. (2d) 416, 423 .
  • State v. O'DONNELL 158 N.W.2d 699 Minn. 1968
  • State v. O'DONNELL 158 N.W.2d 699 Minn. 1968
    Our responsibility extends no further than to make a painstaking review of the record to determine whether the evidence, direct and circumstantial, viewed most favorably to support a finding of guilt, was sufficient to permit the jury to reach that conclusion.” State v. Kline, 266 Minn. 372, 374 , 124 N. W. (2d) 416 , *221 418, certiorari denied, 376 U. S. 962 , 84 S. Ct. 1124 , 11 L. ed. (2d) 980.
  • State v. Carlson 158 N.W.2d 199 Minn. 1968
  • State v. Carlson 158 N.W.2d 199 Minn. 1968
    In State v. Kline, 266 Minn. 372, 374 , 124 N. W. (2d) 416, 418 , we said: “In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence we should emphasize that we do not try the facts anew.
  • State v. Harrison 156 N.W.2d 763 Minn. 1968
  • State v. Harrison 156 N.W.2d 763 Minn. 1968
    State v. Kline, 266 Minn. 372 , 124 N. W. (2d) 416 , certiorari denied, 376 U. S. 962 , 84 S. Ct. 1124 , 11 L. ed. (2d) 980; State v. Norgaard, 272 Minn. 48 , 136 N. W. (2d) 628 ; Cady v. United States, 54 App. D. C. 10, 293 F. 829 .
  • State v. Kotka 152 N.W.2d 445 Minn. 1967
  • State v. Kotka 152 N.W.2d 445 Minn. 1967
    The standard of appellate review in any such case, however, is that stated in State v. Kline, 266 Minn. 372, 374 , 124 N. W. (2d) 416, 418 , certiorari denied, 376 U. S. 962 , 84 S. Ct. 1124 , 11 L. ed. (2d) 980: “* * * [W]e do not try the facts anew.
  • State v. Crosby 151 N.W.2d 297 Minn. 1967
  • State v. Crosby 151 N.W.2d 297 Minn. 1967
    1 State v. Kline, 266 Minn. 372 , 124 N. W. (2d) 416 , certiorari denied, 376 U. S. 962 , 84 S. Ct. 1124 , 11 L. ed. (2d) 980.